Opinion
Opinion By: Jack Conway, Attorney General; Amye L. Bensenhaver, Assistant Attorney General
Open Meetings Decision
The question presented in this appeal is whether the University of Louisville Graduate Student Academic Grievance Committee violated the Open Meetings Act by refusing to admit Christopher M. Grande to its March 6, 2013, meeting at which the committee discussed his request for appeal. 1 Dr. Grande, who is represented in this open meetings appeal by J. Fox DeMoisey, asserts that the committee is a public agency within the meaning of KRS 61.805(2)(b) and that its meetings are subject to the requirements of the Act. The University disputes Dr. Grande's position, asserting that the committee "never deals with 'public business' and is not a public agency as defined in the Kentucky Open Meetings Act. " Alternatively, the University argues that the committee "is a quasi-judicial body that exclusively considers matters involving individual students and as such falls within the exceptions from the formalities of the Open Meetings Act pursuant to KRS 61.815(2)." Based on the analysis found in 12-OMD-140 and 13-OMD-037, we disagree.
In its supplemental response to Dr. Grande's appeal, the University describes the committee as follows:
The GSAGC exercises both original and appellate jurisdiction over student grievance. It has original jurisdiction over academic grievances brought by students enrolled in the School of Interdisciplinary and Graduate Studies ("SIGS"), and appellate jurisdiction over academic grievances brought by graduate students that have previously been heard in unit-level grievance processes.
The Committee is made up of ten members. Two of the members are students who are elected or appointed by the Graduate Student Council, which is made up of all graduate students who are not enrolled in "professional" programs(such as the JD, MBA, MD, or DMD programs).Eight of the GSAGC members are faculty members selected by vote of the Graduate Council. The Graduate Council consists of the Dean of the School of Interdisciplinary and Graduate Studies, plus 25 "voting members." These members consist of twenty "Faculty Councilors" elected by other faculty members; two graduate student representatives selected by the Graduate Student Association and its Council; and three graduate program directors appointed by the SIGS dean. The GSAGC exercises its appellate authority pursuant to Section 6.8 of the University's Redbook .
(Footnotes omitted.) Like the University Student Grievance Committee, whose status as a public agency was confirmed in 12-OMD-140, and the University Arts and Sciences Student Grievance Committee, whose status as a public agency was confirmed in 13-OMD-037, a majority of the University Graduate Student Academic Grievance Committee's members are appointed by a public agency as defined in . . . [KRS 61.805(2)(a) through (h)], a member or employee of a 'public agency, ' a state or local officer, or any combination thereof." KRS 61.805(2)(f) . The referenced open meetings decisions are dispositive of the issues presented here, including the issue of academic privacy under the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), 20 U.S.C. 1232g.
Here, too, the legal issues "are substantially identical to those we addressed in 12-OMD-140" and 13-OMD-037. Copies of those decisions are attached and their reasoning adopted as the basis for our decision here. The Graduate Student Academic Grievance Committee is a public agency as defined in KRS 61.805(2)(f). Its refusal to admit Dr. Grande to its March 6 meeting constituted a violation of the Open Meetings Act.
A party aggrieved by this decision may appeal it by initiating action in the appropriate circuit court pursuant to KRS 61.846(4)(a). The Attorney General should be notified of any action in circuit court, but should not be named as a party in that action or in any subsequent proceedings.
Distributed to:
Christopher M. GrandeJ. Fox DeMoiseyAngela D. KoshewaDeborah H. Patterson
Footnotes
Footnotes